The background description includes information that may be useful in understanding the present invention. It is not an admission that any of the information provided herein is prior art or relevant to the presently claimed invention, or that any publication specifically or implicitly referenced is prior art.
All publications identified herein are incorporated by reference to the same extent as if each individual publication or patent application were specifically and individually indicated to be incorporated by reference. Where a definition or use of a term in an incorporated reference is inconsistent or contrary to the definition of that term provided herein, the definition of that term provided herein applies and the definition of that term in the reference does not apply.
Mounting systems can be used in various circumstances to support equipment onto walls, roofs, and other surfaces. Many of these systems use mounting attachments that fasten onto the wall, roof or other surface in order to adequately support the weight of the equipment. While weight distribution is beneficial for the surface supporting the mounted equipment, the location of the mounting attachments can create other structural or regulatory problems.
For example, conventional roof mounting systems use mounting points of attachment called standoffs which are fastened with lag bolts through the structural framing members (e.g., truss, rafter, etc.) of the roof. To be installed properly, conventional roof mounted points of attachment require finding the centerline of the structural framing member through the roof sheathing with specialty tools or by trial and error drilling and patching. Consequently, this methodology weakens the structural integrity of the roof framing and can damage the roof rafters or roof trusses.
When used on tile roofing, conventional roof mounted points of attachment require that certain roof tiles be removed and cut or notched and then re-installed around the standoff. Alternatively, metal flashing may be used to replace the tile, but this is expensive and still requires removing the roof tile and locating the framing member through the roof sheathing.
Installation of conventional roof mounted points of attachment can be labor intensive. In addition, conventional roof mounted points of attachment can create regulatory concerns. For example, some jurisdictions require a special attic inspection because building inspectors are concerned about potential truss or rafter damage occurring when lag bolts are misaligned with the centerline of the framing member. In another example of a regulatory concern, some jurisdictions require that points of attachment be made by anchoring the lag bolts through new solid blocking instead of into the truss or rafter.
Furthermore, conventional roof mounted points of attachment follows the building structural framing member for layout purposes. This usually requires that the spacing between points of attachments be rounded down to the next available structural member (e.g., truss or rafter). Consequently, the number of standoffs needed for proper mounting often exceeds the number required.
Various approaches have been developed in the field of mounting and attachment equipment, such as U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2012/0005983 to Stephan, U.S. Pat. No. 4,321,745 to Ford, U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2013/0240466 to Sponseller, and U.S. Pat. No. 8,136,311 to Liu. While these references provide some benefit in overcoming a problem, there are numerous deficiencies that they fail to overcome.
Thus, there is still a need for a mounting apparatus that is easy to install for mounting equipment onto roofing or other exterior or interior surfaces.